It might be the reason some people are saying it is his fault is because of his political affiliation, not because of his skin color. To automatically assume that it's because of race are in a way racist itself since that is the -first- assumption that is looked at.

I do not like Obama because he's a Democrat and leftist. I'm white and more conservative than not. Some would way I am racist just because I do not like him. *shrug* I look at a person's actions and politics before skin color to judge someone and I am always open to have my mind changed if new facts present itself.

The problem I'd have with someone blaming Obama for the economic turmoil this year is that the forces causing this downfall have been building since the Seventies.

It might be the reason some people are saying it is his fault is because of his political affiliation, not because of his skin color. To automatically assume that it's because of race are in a way racist itself since that is the -first- assumption that is looked at.

I do not like Obama because he's a Democrat and leftist. I'm white and more conservative than not. Some would way I am racist just because I do not like him. *shrug* I look at a person's actions and politics before skin color to judge someone and I am always open to have my mind changed if new facts present itself.

I think that's the least someone can ask of you. If you can't agree with his leftist views at least give the man a fair shake regardless of his skin color, regardless of the fact that his grandfather grew up Muslim in Africa. Unlike the topic I gave this thread, it's a chance to show we have made some progress here.

I for one am tending to lean heavily on assessments I have heard of him. Listen to Bush's exit speech, even at the end he's stumbling over his own words, offering mistruths so obvious they're making him look stupid. Obama, by contrast in all his appearances since November has had a calm and almost steely focus and cognizance about him. One media article described it as an Obi-Wan Kenobi calm; not quite so funny when you realize how on the mark it appears to be.

I do believe he's not only about to be a good president, but an exceptional president.

You have a solid point. The topic of interracial wasn't openly discussed a few decades ago, now it's not a real issue except with the most hidebound among us. These things come in increments; it's not that America at large has to grow up, but a very troublesome and vocal conservative portion that feels they got it all right because they- a) read it in a moldering old holy book so it must be the truth, b) they can't escape the ignorance and bigotry that their own parents raised them with, c) they're just plain uncomfortable with the topic and want it to go away, to the point of making it illegal, d) many cultures raise men with this machismo attitude, when in reality they're just overgrown little boys that can deal with the world when it does something they don't understand.

Whatever the reason, this is the next big thing that's on our plate for civil rights in the country. The right can only slow it down, they can't hold it back forever. The fear mongers that believe this is going to be the downfall of society are the same idiots that are ranting electing a black man to the highest office in the land means white America is lost. It's stupidity at its worst, in reality we’re just leveling the table, and that’s what America is supposed to be about.

And for the record, I liked Professor X too, but Magneto knew how to get shit done. :)

Not to derail the conversation, Overlord: but Dr. Doom rules all! ^_^

BTW: yay for gay marriage! ::is just another heterosexual guy for gay marriage::

To clarify...I'm not nominating Obama for sainthood. I'm not that crazy about the guy myself. In fact, his recent decision to piss away $350 billion in bailout money trying to reflate the housing bubble to me is somewhere between desperation and a stubborn refusal to learn from the past. Housing is the last thing we should be investing in right now--there's a glut of it and it needs to be marked down to market just like any other overproduced commodity. I'm really not a big fan of any of these corporate bailouts, because they are a mockery of justice.

To me the bailouts are a big "fuck you" to the American people. The message being sent is that if you're a little guy, like a homeowner or small business owner, and you fail, hard cheese; sucks to be you. Market forces and personal responsibility and all that. But if you're in the elite, "you're too big to fail." Nonsense! If the "free market"--that man with the croupier stick--can take Grandma's chips off the table if she loses a bet, he should be able to take AIG's or Citigroup's too. Fair is fair. AIG is not indispensable to the economy. No company is. Maybe the future of consumer finance is more along the model of prosper.com than OmniMegaBank, and keeping these dinosaurs alive is just halting progress and weakening the economy in the long run.

So no, my bone to pick isn't with principled criticism of Obama and his positions, but rather with the knee-jerk reaction and smear campaigns launched by certain people and groups.

To clarify...I'm not nominating Obama for sainthood. I'm not that crazy about the guy myself. In fact, his recent decision to piss away $350 billion in bailout money trying to reflate the housing bubble to me is somewhere between desperation and a stubborn refusal to learn from the past. Housing is the last thing we should be investing in right now--there's a glut of it and it needs to be marked down to market just like any other overproduced commodity. I'm really not a big fan of any of these corporate bailouts, because they are a mockery of justice.

To me the bailouts are a big "fuck you" to the American people. The message being sent is that if you're a little guy, like a homeowner or small business owner, and you fail, hard cheese; sucks to be you. Market forces and personal responsibility and all that. But if you're in the elite, "you're too big to fail." Nonsense! If the "free market"--that man with the croupier stick--can take Grandma's chips off the table if she loses a bet, he should be able to take AIG's or Citigroup's too. Fair is fair. AIG is not indispensable to the economy. No company is. Maybe the future of consumer finance is more along the model of prosper.com than OmniMegaBank, and keeping these dinosaurs alive is just halting progress and weakening the economy in the long run.

So no, my bone to pick isn't with principled criticism of Obama and his positions, but rather with the knee-jerk reaction and smear campaigns launched by certain people and groups.

The problem I keep seeing with not doing bailouts is not so much the companies, but the collateral they will do in their passing.

For instance; Detroit. I drive a Japanese car because they consistently score as good runners, where as most domestic brands are crap these days. Now to some of the diehards out there that believe in 'buying American' no matter what, I'm sure I'm a commie or something, but if Detroit wants me to buy from then, then they need to clean up their act and make better shit.

God damnit people, this country made some of the best autos in the world this past century; I KNOW we can still do it, but Detroit, Motown, is a bygone era riding on its good name from half a century ago. The suits in Detroit have their heads planted firmly in their rectums, every last one of them. They don't care about their products, so why should I? As a popular musician said some years back, blind faith in your leaders or in anything can get you killed.

That's why I'd say let GM fall on its ass, but it's going to leave a huge smoking crater when it falls that will make Ground Zero look like a hole on one of their golf courses. It won't be just their employees but the periphery companies that supply and depend on Detroit.

Maybe we ought to let the big three drop, then pass the bailout money to their blue collar employees so they can remake Detroit right.

At least not passing the bailouts would get the damage over quicker. The company's assests would still be there and they'd either have to sell off to companies that can work with them or renew themselves and get back to the basics that made the companies giants in the first place. Will it hurt people? Yes, but in the long run it's better for the company to succeed or fail without govenment help. If you think a company run by their current heads is bad, one run by the government would be worse.

Government = commitee snafu at it's worst. Companies are supposed to look out for the bottom line and show a profit. A government does not and usualy does not work that way.

One thing that I recall Obama saying was the suggestion that some of Detroit's execs should get the axe over this. I was saying something like this beforehand; that a condition of the bailout has to be the top brass must go, as this is their doing.

In my view something like this must occur: It must be more than a bailout that must be repaid in a set time, there must be severe punishment for the leveling of bungling that has occurred. If any of us here were involved in incompetence that sent our employers filing for bankruptcy, we'd be out on our asses. The danger I feel lies in setting a bad precedent. If you give your kid a Corvette and he drives it into a tree, giving him a new one is not the answer. These guys got to exec level in Detroit and I'm sure they're quite full of themselves for their level of success; time to see if the big boys can survive an enrollment at the school of hard knocks.

I agree that the top executives should be fired. Just because they are allegedly not flying around in their private jets doesn't mean they're going to run their companies any better. It's completely ridiculous that the whole thing is even up for debate... these people made shitty cars and made a ton of mistakes, why should they be in charge of trying to get things back together? ; Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that many people are just too afraid to get the executives fired because it'd seem too much like 'socialism' to some, which would turn the government into a bunch of crazy communists, of course, right?

I think what most people don't understand is that current events are not an indictment of failure of a single company, or even a group of companies. It isn't the shortcomings of one of the two political parties. The economic crisis isn't caused by "too much" government, or "too little" government. Neither the Left nor the Right have a clue. The paradigms that have been the mainstay of Western (especially American) politics are somewhere between inadequate and useless to handle the current crisis.

Oh Detroit alone would not be and could not be the cause of the national recession, but they've been sucking wind for a good long time.

I see Detroit as a nice working model of government in general, bloated and overgrown with no genuine interest in the general public, looking out for their own wallets first and foremost. Do the research and see that time and again US cars are coming up short, especially compared to the Japanese makers such as Toyota and Honda. It's a chronic condition entirely of their own making.

This goes back decades. They didn't bother with seat belts and air bags, things we take for granted now, until federal agencies took them by the hand and made them do it. Go ahead and watch Michael Moore's Who Killed the Electric Car? Yes I know, the naysayers among you are chomping at the bit this every instant, getting your neurons in a tangle trying to type out something clever to describe that so-called overweight loudmouth...the reality is that your own fat American ass is probably sitting there right now reading this trying to figure out how you can sucessfully call Moore a commie. The movie will enrage you at the Big Three, the sheer level of greed and incompetence compelled me to even wish the next round hijacked airliners would be sent into the Detroit skyline in retaliation, but I digress.

Same thing could be said of Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac, their mismanagement of loans crashed the housing market. This is all mostly due to greed and stupidity. You can throw big business and big government into the pot and roast them for all this.

Yes I know, the naysayers among you are chomping at the bit this every instant, getting your neurons in a tangle trying to type out something clever to describe that so-called overweight loudmouth...the reality is that your own fat American ass is probably sitting there right now reading this trying to figure out how you can sucessfully call Moore a commie.

Completely unnecessary, and shame on you for pulling away from your point with something like that. Regardless of my feelings on Michael Moore, this is out of line.

A point of note. TO. If the Electric car was suppressed in the US. why isn't it avalible at better prices and quality overseas? Not the ones that are still less than equal to the current gasoline/diesel vehicals, but ones that equal or surpass them. There's no one design to make an electric car and if the other companies were so hot to take market share, they'd have spit them out years ago and the current model should be as good as a gas one or damned close.

By equal I mean the the ability to just being able to hop into the thing and drive off at highway speeds for + miles, refill in less than 5 minutes, be reliable and relatively cheap to buy. The movie you point out is aimed at the US Big 3, not foreign companiesd which are -not- controlled by the Big 3.

Quote

Yes I know, the naysayers among you are chomping at the bit this every instant, getting your neurons in a tangle trying to type out something clever to describe that so-called overweight loudmouth...the reality is that your own fat American ass is probably sitting there right now reading this trying to figure out how you can sucessfully call Moore a commie. The movie will enrage you at the Big Three, the sheer level of greed and incompetence compelled me to even wish the next round hijacked airliners would be sent into the Detroit skyline in retaliation, but I digress.

I agree with the last two posters. You should moderate your anger in posting. To wish the death of someone in such a manner is below you if civilized.

1. The battery. Try as they might, scientists haven't been able to create a battery that, fully charged, has anywhere near the same ergs of energy as a similar volume of gasoline. Thus, the electric car battery is bulky and the mileage low compared to gasoline. After a few years, the battery must be replaced, creating logistical and environmental issues (not to mention a big fat expense for the consumer).

2. The primary source of electricity is the burning of fossil fuels. Hence, the electric car doesn't really save energy. It just shifts the locus of consumption from the internal combustion engine to the power plants.

Completely unnecessary, and shame on you for pulling away from your point with something like that. Regardless of my feelings on Michael Moore, this is out of line.

It's making a point and a preempt, we all know there's no way anyone can invoke Moore without someone rolling their eyes and calling him a commie, a fat liberal, a retard, etc.

..you guys fill in the blank but you know it's true. You know it's true, don't even go there. Bottom line is that the guy does his research and puts out some compelling cinema. He doesn't make this crap up, even if he puts it in weighted documentary fashion.

Tell you what, make you a deal. I won't mention the 'liberal windbag' but in return the conservative camp is forbidden from invoking Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilley. The right, if anything, is not short on hot air.

Point is, lambaste Moore if you want, but it's going to be pot calling kettle black. My point holds up, even if the delivery wasn't popular.

Open your eyes. It's not actually your point that was uncalled-for, and it was not Moore that was drawing criticism. You launched a pre-emptive ad hominem on anyone who might be reading that paragraph in the interests of defending your point. Not only is it sloppy, it's rude. That was the problem. Posters' feelings on Michael Moore didn't even enter into it.

You are already on 'defensive-mode' before anyone even replies to agree with or attack you. It's shoddy, offputting, and, as Zakharra said, beneath you. It was worthy of comment because you are usually better than that - so please don't stoop to insulting people, but concentrate on the actual subject at hand.

Now that I think about it, I request a close to this thread. I can't say anything without someone around here 'taking offense' over it, and I just don't walk on eggshells. To hell with political correctness.

You guys want to sit on the front row of the mudpit and ogle but you're all afraid to actually get dirty. I'm done with this topic, lock it up and be done with.

A point of note. TO. If the Electric car was suppressed in the US. why isn't it avalible at better prices and quality overseas? Not the ones that are still less than equal to the current gasoline/diesel vehicals, but ones that equal or surpass them. There's no one design to make an electric car and if the other companies were so hot to take market share, they'd have spit them out years ago and the current model should be as good as a gas one or damned close.

I'd be interested to know if you have an answer to the bolded text, personally. It's the main reason for watching the thread.

I'd be interested to know if you have an answer to the bolded text, personally. It's the main reason for watching the thread.

Actually, I missed that post the first time around but I don't have a suitable answer for that, because I'll admit I don't have a lot of information on what auto makers are doing beyond US borders. I can only tell you about the level of ineptitude occurring with domestic automakers. In the case of the cover-up with GM over their electric model (which was a feasible alternative vehicle), Moore called them out on it...he didn't make the story up.

He showed the cars, he interviewed the temporary owners, he got their stories. If you want to go so far as to say Moore made it all up, then it's just as easy to say GM covered it all up. And in terms of capability; a movie director vs. a multi-billion global corporation, who's going to be more capable of bending the truth (or burying it)?

I mean, sure, maybe Moore bought a Chevy one day and it left him walking on the side the highway and he had a bone to pick with GM and he wrote a script on the back of his tow truck bill. To quote a favorite comedian, it could happen. But you really have to start questioning motive and agenda here, and believe me you me, I know from personal experience just how deep the rabbit hole goes when it comes to big business burying the truth.

But if you've followed me so far, then I'll hazard a guess on that query: More than just US corporations get overblown and sluggish with the status quo. Why spend millions in researching alternative cars when you can keep selling what you sell? Take just about any auto exec...Big Three, Toyota, Honda, BMW, etc., and drag them by their ear out of their board meetings and poll them. Ask them if saving the environment is really, really on their list of priorities anywhere close to next quarter's profits.

This is not to say that nothing is being done on the matter, and I'll leave you all with this- Note again that this is a Japanese maker taking the initiative.

Now that I think about it, I request a close to this thread. I can't say anything without someone around here 'taking offense' over it, and I just don't walk on eggshells. To hell with political correctness.

You guys want to sit on the front row of the mudpit and ogle but you're all afraid to actually get dirty. I'm done with this topic, lock it up and be done with.

Instead of throwing a tantrum and saying you're leaving the thread because people didn't like what you said, you could just apologize. What you said did not need to be added into that post - you could've made your point without saying such a silly thing such as that. What do you expect to happen when you decide to call everyone who might disagree with you 'a fat american who thinks Michael Moore is a commie'. It's just an immature debating tactic to insult people before they've even disagreed with you and presented you with their argument.